Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Re: That Damn Gap Ad | FOX News Does it Again »

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

The Male Pill

posted by on October 10 at 12:51 PM

Several new types of male contraceptive may soon become available, including an implant (similar to a female IUD), a patch or gel, an implant that goes under the skin, shots, and a daily pill similar to the female birth-control pill that has been available since 1960.

Not surprisingly, the stories on the new male contraceptive options shift their focus almost immediately from the science behind the developments to whether men will even consider using hormonal contraceptives in the first place. From the BBC :

These have the advantage of being readily reversible, meaning a man could use it repeatedly at different times in his life, stopping to have children in between.

But these act on the whole body and can have unwanted side effects, like the female pill. Some men also say they do not find hormonal methods acceptable because they feel it somehow threatens their masculinity.

And from MSNBC:

Forty-year-old Scott Hardin says he’s glad that men may soon have a new choice when it comes to birth control. But, he adds, he would not even consider taking a male hormonal contraceptive. Hardin is like many men who are pleased to hear they may have a new option but are wary of taking any type of hormones.

Many men won’t consider taking what millions and millions of women have been putting into their bodies for nearly half a century, because they regard it as unsafe. Interesting.

Thoughts? Guys, would you take the pill, patch or shot?

RSS icon Comments

1
Posted by john | October 10, 2006 12:55 PM
2

Just get a damn vasectomy already.

But that doesn't answer the question: I suppose if I hadn't already had some stranger rummaging around in my scrotum with a scalpel, I'd have to make that decision. So. . .

It would depend on the exact side-effects--if it's no big deal, then sure, if it eliminates the necessity for condoms, it'd be worth it.

And of course most men won't consider doing things millions of women do every day: we're too busy invading places and fucking things up to take pills every day. Being the hegemons is a lot of work.

Bill

Posted by bill | October 10, 2006 12:55 PM
3

Well yea, they don't have to worry about about squeezing a watermelon out their anus 9 months later. Why would they want to take a pill?

Posted by ky | October 10, 2006 12:56 PM
4

I would use male bc. I would be attracted to the control it gives me (ie woman says she is on the pill but then "a miracle happenns" and suddenly I'm a papa). But I have to say, I wouldn't use until it has been on the market for a few years. FDA approval does not = safe.

As far as the idea that men want their bitches taking hormones but would not take them themselves; uh, yeah, men have double standards. It is the halmark of the male psyche. Is anyone surprised?

Posted by Mike in MO | October 10, 2006 12:59 PM
5

one advantage of only fucking guys.

Posted by konstantconsumer | October 10, 2006 1:03 PM
6

Since some women feel they can excuse any boorish or psycho behavior on their part as just "hormones", is it any wonder guys don't want to take hormones?

Sorry ladies, it may be ugly, but it's the truth.

Posted by Pre Post Menstrual Rage | October 10, 2006 1:08 PM
7

The "Male IUD" doesn't sound so bad. Although I bet insertion is painful.

I would totally forget a pill, and I suspect taking an extra dose the next day wouldn't work as well for men.

Posted by flamingbanjo | October 10, 2006 1:29 PM
8

What do guys blame their boorish and psycho behavior on? It's not like men take personal responsibility when they act like jerks.

Posted by no | October 10, 2006 1:30 PM
9

OK. Let's be real.

Pill, patch, or shot.

Nah, since I'm not getting pregnant, I'll just pay for half of my girlfriend's birth control and reap the rewards.

Fair? Nope. But that's the reality.

I can see some guy freaked by the possibility of getting some wannabe-pregger neocon chick in the mommy track buying the patch - psychologically, a patch says "I'm getting lucky this week" while a pill says "I need my meds" and a shot says "I brand myself and like to wear metal jewelry". Nothing wrong with any of them, but I think the patch will go over better.

Posted by Will in Seattle | October 10, 2006 1:30 PM
10

Men have "periods" of hormonally-based emotional swings that are just as dramatic as any PMSing woman. They just don't like to talk about it.

Posted by Fnarf | October 10, 2006 1:40 PM
11

Would you trust a man to take a pill everyday??? I wouldn't. Not for an f-ing second.

Posted by dontgetmyhopesup | October 10, 2006 1:43 PM
12

Uh, no, Fnarf. Swings, yes. But not as great.

Posted by Sachi | October 10, 2006 1:43 PM
13

Fnarf & Sachi: Men have periods. They usually last from age 12 to age 58.

Posted by Mike in MO | October 10, 2006 1:49 PM
14

The men who will actually use birth control will be those ones convinced that women want to trap them into unwanted parenthood so the women can live large on the $400/month child support payments for the next 18 years. And yes, those men exist. Dudes, if that's something you're worried about, go get your shot. Or get snipped.

No woman's going to actually trust that a man is taking birth control, though, not if she's sensible. But there will be men, either those I've mentioned above, or those whose wives or girlfriends can't use birth control themselves (for a lot of reasons), who will. In most cases, I think the smart thing would be for anyone who does not wish to become a parent - male or female - to be religious in following their own birth control regimen, and not depend on someone else to do so for them.

Posted by Geni | October 10, 2006 1:51 PM
15

This would all be solved if ever guy in america would just start fucking every other guy's ass.

Seriously though, if I were straight, I would at least try it and see how bad the side effects were. It would kinda suck if it made you grow boobs or something. But the ladies have been dealing with the pill for years now, so I suppose its straight guys's turn.

I think I'll just stick to man on man action as my contraceptive, thanks.

Posted by brandon | October 10, 2006 1:51 PM
16

Until we're sure of the side effects and long term effects, absolutely not.

Then again, I'm not a big fan of the pill either for this very reason, though I understand and support women who choose to take it anyway.

Posted by Gomez | October 10, 2006 2:19 PM
17

Well at least now, thank the Lord, men who whine about getting "trapped" into fatherhood will have only themselves to blame.

Posted by keshmeshi | October 10, 2006 2:28 PM
18

I would absolutely use a male pill, patch or injection. Good hormone-based birth control methods already have a higher success rate (of preventing pregnancy) than tubal ligation. A couple who are both using hormone-based birth control have as close to a nill chance of getting pregnant, way less than either individually using it.

Added bonus: most strategies for men involve testosterone (plus a 5-alpha-reductase inhibitor). Can be buff without working out or losing my hair AND not have kids. Sign me up!

Posted by golob | October 10, 2006 2:37 PM
19

My birth control method is homosexuality. I feel very secure knowing that if any of my sex partners were to get pregnant, there would be no concerns over the cost of raising that child, as hundreds of scientists would be busy making their careers off it.

Posted by Gitai | October 10, 2006 2:53 PM
20

"I'm not a big fan of the pill either for this very reason, though I understand and support women who choose to take it anyway."

That's really big of you Gomez. God knows the world's female population couldn't bear taking the pill without your understanding and support.

Posted by Seth | October 10, 2006 2:58 PM
21

Huh...women get the option to control their reproductive destiny with a daily pill that also happens to dramatically lower their risk of cancer, osteoporosis, ovarian cysts and endometriosis, while simultaneously making their breasts bigger and clearing up their skin. Yet, some of them complain about it, as if a pill were the most oppressive form of patriarchy since the whale-bone corset.

Let me tell you something: if it turns out that science can make a pill that gives men the ability to control their reproductive destiny with 99.9% reliablility, while simultaneously preventing pattern baldness, dramatically reducing their risk of prostate cancer and enlarging their cocks, men will be beating down the door to get a prescription.

If, however, the alternative to the Rubber Cock Sheath is a pill that may or may not make us grow tits, well, I think we might be a bit less eager to try it out. Call it misogyny, but that's just how we are....

(Note: I wrote this up Barnett-style, so that you would have an easier time discerning my point...hope it helped!)

Posted by A Nony Mouse | October 10, 2006 3:27 PM
22

"This would all be solved if ever guy in america would just start fucking every other guy's ass."

Or every ladies. Sex in the ass, give babies a pass.

I would gladly take male BC if the side effects were similar to those women face. Hell I would at least give it a try and see what happens. Probably opt for the implant since taking a pill everyday is likely beyond my abilities. Nto as a male, but as a lazy SOB.

Posted by Giffy | October 10, 2006 3:27 PM
23

LOL Seth in #20. "YOU TAKE THE PILL WHEN I TELL YOU TO, BITCH!"

Posted by Gomez | October 10, 2006 3:36 PM
24

Now, if they actually made a combo drug - birth control and viagra/cialis/whatever - now THAT might work.

Posted by Will in Seattle | October 10, 2006 3:43 PM
25

Sure I'd use it, even just to square-root the already-low probability of having a child - you're all wusses. But, then, I have an overdeveloped sense of fairness and responsibility, and no male friends. Go figure.

Posted by Noink | October 10, 2006 4:27 PM
26

Actually, I think growing tits would be kinda cool. Would definitely weed out the not-open-minded partners.

Posted by Noink | October 10, 2006 4:32 PM
27

Not all birth control pills have the same side effects and not all women experience the same (or all or any) side effects. That's a misconception (snap!) that a lot of men have - just like most men assuming that all women have PMS.

It's also interesting to me that a lot of the same guys who were denying that they had male privilage in an earlier thread are embracing it here. Hmmm...

Posted by Soupytwist | October 10, 2006 4:33 PM
28

Ugh. Everybody should be wary of being the first to take a new drug.

Posted by chris | October 10, 2006 4:54 PM
29

The female pill kills my wife's sex drive, and I can't bring myself to get a vasectomy. I'd definitely consider this.

Posted by Sean | October 10, 2006 6:57 PM
30

My only question is if it will also take 40+ years for the male pill to be covered by most insurance plans. 'Cuz, you know, sex is bad and must be punished...unless you have a prescription for Viagra, in which case, go right ahead and boink for free with the company plan.

Posted by Ponderous | October 10, 2006 7:25 PM
31

I'd definitely take a male birth control pill, but I'd be VERY wary of testosterone pills or injections. I'd be much more comfortable with hormonal birth control that reduces testosterone or gnrh levels. That would probably have the effect of reducing sex drive a little bit, but I really don't need to be masturbating this much while my girlfriend's at work anyway. Men with lower testosterone levels also have the side effect of lower cancer rates, better heart health, and a longer lifespan overall. It's sad that pharmaceutical companies don't think that will sell well compared to more acne, balding, and aggression (and they might be right).

BTW, Fnarf is not only right about men (on AVERAGE) having as many mood swings as women, he's understating it. It's a very consistent finding that men have more mood swings than women (in number and intensity) on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. This is has been supported in all kinds of science: self-reports (daily logs), observation (logs of others), and behavioral (changes in behavior).

Posted by jerd | October 10, 2006 7:35 PM
32

I took birth control pills for more than 15 years, before I could finally talk a doctor into giving me a tubal ligation. I loved them. You know what my side-effects were? I had virtually no periods and no hormonal mood swings or cramps. I never had those things until I was in my 30s and long since off the pill. I didn't know what the hell cramps WERE the first time I had them. I thought I was dying!

I've never had PMS either, unless you count getting a trifle over-sentimental a few days beforehand (getting weepy over puppy stories, things like that). On the other hand, I've known men who apparently had PMS 365 goddam days of the year...

Posted by Geni | October 11, 2006 12:36 PM
33

My concerns:
Female birth control needs to be effective at stopping ONE egg.

Male birth control needs to be effective at stopping every last sperm of the 20 to 600 MILLION that get shot out.

And what kind of toxicity is that kind of drug going to have on the rest of your body?

Posted by him | October 11, 2006 5:43 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).